TOP obama Intelligence Official CLUELESS about London Bomb Plot (terrorism, million, security)

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Janet has commented on this.

She said those that needed to know about it knew.
So obviously this guy didn't need to know.
Maybe he's just a nice figure head for the agency ?

Security is on a need to know basis.
And the Top Intel Official doesn't need to know..got it ?

Oh yeah, that makes so much sense. The Top US Intelligence Official kept in the dark, not briefed, absolutely CLUELESS on national TV.... and it's OK if he doesn't know about it.

The administration disagrees with YOUR argument. They have admitted the guy should have known.

Big Sis is just doing a little CYA, when she said that she knew.

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

That is just as stupid as the suggestion I should call Janet Napolitano for some obscure reason. You want to argue with "the players' then be my guest. I'm here arguing with you.

He hadn't been briefed on that yet. So what?


And now he's not.

The evidence is before you, in the form of his deer in the headlight, blank stare when asked about the case in London. London? London?? As he looks helplessly at the others to pull his useless butt out of the fire.

And then he admitted he didn't know about it.

What more do you need? Your spin will not help you here, not when we have a wonderful video of ineptitude, incompetence and cluelessness before our very eyes.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by sanrene

The evidence is before you, in the form of his deer in the headlight, blank stare when asked about the case in London. London? London?? As he looks helplessly at the others to pull his useless butt out of the fire.

And then he admitted he didn't know about it.

And he didn't. He hadn't been briefed on the arrests.

Now the question to you is... given what we know about the actual plot and the arrests... what difference did it make? Other than inspire in you a paroxysm of poultry-like clucking?

Exactly what would he personally have done with that information in the hours between the arrests and the interview that was not already being done by the intelligence community?

Originally Posted by sanrene

What more do you need? Your spin will not help you here, not when we have a wonderful video of ineptitude, incompetence and cluelessness before our very eyes.

Not a damn thing... since I actually know the difference between "ineptitude" and having not been briefed before a news interview.

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

And he didn't. He hadn't been briefed on the arrests.

Now the question to you is... given what we know about the actual plot and the arrests... what difference did it make? Other than inspire in you a paroxysm of poultry-like clucking?

Exactly what would he personally have done with that information in the hours between the arrests and the interview that was not already being done by the intelligence community?


Not a damn thing... since I actually know the difference between "ineptitude" and having not been briefed before a news interview.

Who knows? Certainly not you.

The point again; He was ignorant, clueless of the terror plot and arrests taking place in London. One would think the top US official in charge of intelligence would know about such an event.

Why...even the WH admits he should have known...which kind of blows your spin out of the water and confirms my position.

[chucksnee]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

And since you have no insight whatsoever regarding what those people knew or when, your comment remains a bold display of clueless hand waving. One guy is not a "they," and there is only one guy you can point to who didn't know about the arrests.

And you do? What I can tell you for a FACT is that, as a person who has been in the military for over 21 years..when something went wrong that I knew my bosses boss would have to answer for....Guess what...us cronies told them...(them)you know the guys in charge...because us cronies would not have to answer, but they/them (the bosses) will......is that so hard to understand? It must be...

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

There was no "incident" at all. There were arrests.

Really? Well, someone as educated as you must be able to do a search on dictionary.com for the word "incident"....and if you disagree with these definition...well....

noun 1an individual occurrence or event.

2a distinct piece of action, or an episode, as in a story or play.

3something that occurs casually in connection with something else.

4something appertaining or attaching to something else.

5. an occurrence of seemingly minor importance, esp. involving nations or factions between which relations are strained and sensitive, that can lead to serious consequences, as an outbreak of hostilities or a war: border incident; international incident.

6. an embarrassing occurrence, esp. of a social nature.

–adjective 7. likely or apt to happen (usually fol. by to ).

8. naturally appertaining: hardships incident to the life of an explorer.

9. conjoined or attaching, esp. as subordinate to a principal thing.

10. falling or striking on something, as light rays





There was no "event." There were arrests in another country.

Again...really...

noun 1. something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence, esp. one of some importance.

2. the outcome, issue, or result of anything: The venture had no successful event.

3. something that occurs in a certain place during a particular interval of time.

4. Physics . in relativity, an occurrence that is sharply localized at a single point in space and instant of time. Compare world point.

5. Sports . any of the contests in a program made up of one sport or of a number of sports: The broad jump event followed the pole vault.

—Idioms 6. in any event, regardless of what happens; in any case. Also, at all events.

7. in the event of, if there should be: In the event of rain, the party will be held indoors.

8. in the event that, if it should happen that; in case: In the event that I can't come back by seven, you can eat without me.

Origin:
1560–70; < L ēventus occurrence, outcome, equiv. to ēven ( īre ) to occur, come out + -tus suffix of v. action

—Related forms e·vent·less, adjective
su·per·e·vent, noun

—Synonyms
1. happening, affair, case, circumstance. Event, episode, incident, occurrence are terms for a happening. An event is usually an important happening: historical events. An episode is one of a series of happenings in a person's life or in a narrative: an episode in one's life. An incident is an event of usually minor importance: an amusing incident in a play. An occurrence is something that happens, often by surprise: His arrival was an unexpected occurrence. 2. consequence.

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

You appear to be completely clueless regarding the intelligence process, how intelligence organizations are run, and who does what within them. Sometimes "the guy at the top" needs to know what is immediately happening. Sometimes, other people in the organization need to be the ones working the problem.

See my first response....those guys WORKING the issue are not the people who will have to answer....the BOSS will, the big guy, the man, and not those cronies....SO WHY would they not tell him?

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

I am always amused at the willingness of rank amateurs to critique and armchair quarterback professionals in fields they know absolutely nothing about.

I am always amused at someone who thinks they know everything, but when confronted..they try to BS their way out of it...Like trying to put another person down...because you assume.....but you know what assume means right....ASSUME make and ASS out of u not me....get it ASS U ME

[quote=chucksnee]I did in my mind.... maybe you should figure out how to number correctly and then you will figure out what I'm saying....[/quoter]

HA HA, whats wrong with your cut and paste....not working?

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

there's a lot going on "in your mind." I can't worry about that... I have to care about what goes on in the real world. Your outrage is your problem. It has little to do with reality.

Not really, it's amazing what happens when not so much is going on...when you can actually sit back and think.....Again...you are assuming,

Because you are not able to understand me, therefore I'm wrong? How dumb does that sound to you? This is the problem with the world....I'm right....does not matter....I'm right your wrong....because I don't understand...your still wrong...

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

And this is demonstrated by your hopeless attempt to analogize Bush after 9/11 and this one guy after arrests in a foreign country.

Nope, again...the boss knew in a matter of a few hours...

How would this look....Bush goes on a TV show being interviewed...the host says well what about the twin tower incident? and Bush goes...what? So you say....it does not matter, OTHER people were taking care of it? How naive of you...

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

Well, since I am not a Democrat, it appears to have been yet another wasted effort on your part.

Just show how you really are....a simple BS move on my part and you are taking offense.....

Good by...

[sanrene]

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

He oversees 16 intelligence agencies.

Obviously, CNN and other News organizations think it "newsworthy" that he was clueless.

James Clapper is the principal adviser to President Obama, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council for intelligence matters related to national security.

[plwhit]

Originally Posted by sickofnyc

How is pointing out the hypocrisy of the OP "bashing" Bush? The facts are the facts and if the facts clearly show the inadequacies and disingenuous actions of the previous administration, one cannot call it bashing. Sometimes the facts are ugly, but don't blame the messenger.

Still pointing fingers at Bush after 2 years, absolutely amazing

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by plwhit

Still pointing fingers at Bush after 2 years, absolutely amazing

As long as the current president's policies continue to fail miserably, they will be pointing the finger at him 3, 4, 6 years down the road.

[plwhit]

Originally Posted by kshe95girl

Bush couldnt pronounce nuclear correctly to save his life....
Just sayin'........

And obama thinks there are 57 states....
Just sayin'........

[twowolves]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

I (for one) am comfortable that the security of our nation does not depend on what any one person knows at any one moment... no matter how high they are.

OH BOY. This post is one tiny reason why this administration is SO scary! And there are ppl like this to support the scariness!

[LauraC]

Originally Posted by sanrene

THE TOP Intelligence Official had NO clue about the plot. Diane was just as shocked about his blank, empty stare. He ADMITTED he had no idea.

Truly amazing, dangerous and incompetent.

I would venture to guess, every poster in this political forum was aware of it and we didn't need a briefing.

I really do think it is scary that he didn't know...unless he has Alzheimers and just forgot he knew and everyone is covering up for him.